Author Topic: Trump says Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’  (Read 3094 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online catfish1957

  • Laken Riley.... Say her Name. And to every past and future democrat voter- Her blood is on your hands too!!!
  • Political Researcher
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,635
  • Gender: Male
Re: Trump says Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’
« Reply #25 on: January 07, 2024, 07:17:23 pm »
He'd just have avoided any specifics and mouthed something about him being a great negotiator.   And then his followers would cheer and say yes, he could have avoided it.  As if every else back then, including Lincoln, was just too dumb to see it.

Trump lives in a bubble of naivety that everything in life can be managed by a business deal.  That is why he has had bankruptcies, multiple failed marriages, and the mindset and reputation of any other sleazy penny ante big shot real estate developer and silly reality TV star.

All faux glitz, no substance.

I display the Confederate Battle Flag in honor of my great great great grandfathers who spilled blood at Wilson's Creek and Shiloh.  5 others served in the WBTS with honor too.

Offline LMAO

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,942
  • Gender: Male
Re: Trump says Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’
« Reply #26 on: January 07, 2024, 07:20:01 pm »
Trump lives in a bubble of naivety that everything in life can be managed by a business deal.  That is why he has had bankruptcies, multiple failed marriages, and the mindset and reputation of any other sleazy penny ante big shot real estate developer and silly reality TV star.

All faux glitz, no substance.

In his defense, the business world is probably all he knows. So running for president and being president probably was a rush for him because it was a new life experience. Without that, all he has is the drudgery of the business world.

It’s like the Rolling Stones still refusing to retire to this day despite the fact that they’re all in their 80s. What else do they have besides the Rolling Stones
I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them.

Barry Goldwater

http://www.usdebtclock.org

My Avatar is my adult autistic son Tommy

Offline GtHawk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,888
  • Gender: Male
  • I don't believe in Trump anymore, he's an illusion
Re: Trump says Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’
« Reply #27 on: January 07, 2024, 07:29:35 pm »
In his defense, the business world is probably all he knows. So running for president and being president probably was a rush for him because it was a new life experience. Without that, all he has is the drudgery of the business world.

It’s like the Rolling Stones still refusing to retire to this day despite the fact that they’re all in their 80s. What else do they have besides the Rolling Stones
A shitload of money? They, the Stones(at this point) and Trump are attention whores...that's my story and I'm sticking to it.
… That's my story.
Oh, that's my story.
Well, I ain't got a witness, and I can't prove it,
But that's my story and I'm stickin' to it."
[/size]
« Last Edit: January 07, 2024, 07:30:47 pm by GtHawk »

Online catfish1957

  • Laken Riley.... Say her Name. And to every past and future democrat voter- Her blood is on your hands too!!!
  • Political Researcher
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,635
  • Gender: Male
Re: Trump says Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’
« Reply #28 on: January 07, 2024, 07:36:07 pm »
In his defense, the business world is probably all he knows. So running for president and being president probably was a rush for him because it was a new life experience. Without that, all he has is the drudgery of the business world.

It’s like the Rolling Stones still refusing to retire to this day despite the fact that they’re all in their 80s. What else do they have besides the Rolling Stones

Most decent business men never declare or have bankruptcies.  I could contend, that he isn't even good at that.

6 offically...

Mostly around gambing and resort properties,

And then there are these gems...

1. Trump Steaks.
2. GoTrump- an online travel site
3. Trump Airlines
4. Trump Vodka
5.  Trump Mortgage
6. Trump: The Game
7. Trump Magazine
8. Trump University
9. Trump Ice -bottled water venture
10. The New Jersey Generals - USFL pro football team
11. Tour de Trump- bicycle race
12. Trump Network -nutritional supplements-  :silly:
13. Trumped! -syndicated radio spot
14. And soon likely  to laughed out of existence-  Truth Central...  A real Social Media Juggernaunt  :silly:

If that is Business Genius, tickle me silly.
I display the Confederate Battle Flag in honor of my great great great grandfathers who spilled blood at Wilson's Creek and Shiloh.  5 others served in the WBTS with honor too.

Offline LMAO

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,942
  • Gender: Male
Re: Trump says Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’
« Reply #29 on: January 07, 2024, 07:40:43 pm »
Most decent business men never declare or have bankruptcies.  I could contend, that he isn't even good at that.

6 offically...

Mostly around gambing and resort properties,

And then there are these gems...

1. Trump Steaks.
2. GoTrump- an online travel site
3. Trump Airlines
4. Trump Vodka
5.  Trump Mortgage
6. Trump: The Game
7. Trump Magazine
8. Trump University
9. Trump Ice -bottled water venture
10. The New Jersey Generals - USFL pro football team
11. Tour de Trump- bicycle race
12. Trump Network -nutritional supplements-  :silly:
13. Trumped! -syndicated radio spot
14. And soon likely  to laughed out of existence-  Truth Central...  A real Social Media Juggernaunt  :silly:

If that is Business Genius, tickle me silly.

Well, that explains his lack of basic economic knowledge. Some of those I’ve never heard of.

Although it’s my understanding that Trump water still exist
I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them.

Barry Goldwater

http://www.usdebtclock.org

My Avatar is my adult autistic son Tommy

Offline Maj. Bill Martin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,943
  • Gender: Male
  • I'll make Mincemeat out of 'em"
Re: Trump says Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’
« Reply #30 on: January 07, 2024, 08:21:47 pm »
In his defense, the business world is probably all he knows.

That is inexcusable.

How many of us have actually been in government or run for national office, yet we are much better informed than he is on all sorts of governmental issues.  And that's because we love and care about the country, and spent a lot of our "leisure" time staying informed.

Trump, by contrast, was chasing women, making garbage TV shows, and playing golf.  Where's the concern for country in all that?   Did he not understand the major issues of the day over the last 45 years?  Did he not pay attention??

The fact that he didn't understand government is an indictment of his unfitness, not a valid excuse.  And that's not even mentioning that he's had the last EIGHT YEARS plus of doing nothing but politics and educating himself.   And he still hasn't.  Also, I suspect that if most of us got a job where we lacked some of the necessary background, we'd bust our ass to catch up.  Trump just doesn't care.

Couldn't he have skipped a few of those golf games to read some freaking books?  Get educated on how government and the law works, study some history?? But he did none of that.

He is an intellectually lazy, narcissistic boob.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2024, 09:15:45 pm by Maj. Bill Martin »

Offline GtHawk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,888
  • Gender: Male
  • I don't believe in Trump anymore, he's an illusion
Re: Trump says Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’
« Reply #31 on: January 07, 2024, 10:23:53 pm »
Well, that explains his lack of basic economic knowledge. Some of those I’ve never heard of.

Although it’s my understanding that Trump water still exist
It absolutely must, because there are members here carrying it for him :whistle:

Offline jmyrlefuller

  • J. Myrle Fuller
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 22,393
  • Gender: Male
  • Realistic nihilist
    • Fullervision
Re: Trump says Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’
« Reply #32 on: January 07, 2024, 10:29:17 pm »
Trump should be ask what he believes Lincoln should have offered the seceding states to reverse their decision.
His withdrawal from the Presidency, for one.

I still believe there could have been a diplomatic solution that eliminated slavery. But instead of de-escalating, every party seemed to escalate the issue further... and Lincoln being forced on the South was the last straw.

We're seeing the same thing happen again. Lord help us learn from the mistakes of our forefathers.
New profile picture in honor of Public Domain Day 2024

Offline jmyrlefuller

  • J. Myrle Fuller
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 22,393
  • Gender: Male
  • Realistic nihilist
    • Fullervision
Re: Trump says Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’
« Reply #33 on: January 07, 2024, 10:30:49 pm »
Trump lives in a bubble of naivety that everything in life can be managed by a business deal.  That is why he has had bankruptcies, multiple failed marriages, and the mindset and reputation of any other sleazy penny ante big shot real estate developer and silly reality TV star.

All faux glitz, no substance.
Ironically, he's engaging in the same stubborn escalation that led to the Civil War in the first place. So even if he's right, he's engaging in the exact opposite behavior to what would have worked.
New profile picture in honor of Public Domain Day 2024

Online Fishrrman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,693
  • Gender: Male
  • Dumbest member of the forum
Re: Trump says Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’
« Reply #34 on: January 07, 2024, 10:53:18 pm »
It looks like Mr. Lincoln made more than one "offer" to the South for a conditional peace:

Source for the following excerpt:
amren.com/archives/back-issues/may-2010/#article1
======================
Lincoln’s priorities

Unlike the radical Republicans, Lincoln never thought of slaveholders as moral inferiors, even saying they were “just what we would be in their situation.” He was related by marriage to Confederates. His wife, Mary Todd, came from a family of 14 children, six of whom supported the North and eight supported the South. One of his wife’s sisters was married to a Confederate general.

Virtually until the end of the war, Lincoln supported gradual, compensated emancipation coupled with colonization — on the initiative of the states, but with federal support. Late in 1861, for example, he proposed a compensated abolition program for Delaware that would have been so gradual that some blacks would have remained slaves into the 20th century. The state legislature did not act on it.

Lincoln thought slavery was wrong but that a society with large numbers of free blacks living among whites was just as wrong. Gradual emancipation coupled with colonization would solve both problems. In 1861, he persuaded Congress to pass a resolution in favor of colonization, but nothing came of it.

In August 1862, Lincoln invited black leaders to the White House — the first time blacks ever came in an official capacity — to ask them to persuade their people to emigrate. As Prof. Escott explains: “He accepted as a fact that the racial problem in America was profound and intractable; he wanted to end the conflict between white Americans and reunite the sections; and he favored the removal of black Americans as a solution.”

Lincoln’s reputation as “the Great Emancipator” rests mainly on the proclamation, but Prof. Escott points out that this document is hardly a ringing endorsement of liberty. As is well known, it promised freedom only to those slaves in Confederate-controlled territory, which is to say, to those slaves over whom Lincoln had no power.

It is less well known that what is called the Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, issued on Sept. 22, 1862, offered the Confederate states 100 days to stop the fighting and send representatives to Congress. Any state that did so was urged to enact compensated emancipation, with funds to be paid from the US treasury. Blacks so freed would be encouraged to emigrate. However, emancipation was to be strictly a matter to be determined by the states, and any state that returned to the union could keep slavery intact. It was only if the southern states persisted in war that the slaves under their control would be freed. As the Cincinnati Gazette explained, “The way to save Slavery is simply to submit to the Constitution. . . . The way to destroy it is to persist in rebellion.”

At that time and repeatedly thereafter, Lincoln stated that the proclamation was strictly a war measure designed to weaken the South’s capacity to fight. He did not draft it in anything like the orotund phrases of which he was capable and thereby make it a monument to liberty. If anything, it reads like a bill of lading. At the same time, Lincoln was so solicitous of the cooperation of border state slave-holders that he exempted Kentucky and Tennessee from the proclamation, even though parts of those states were under Confederate control and would therefore have been subject to emancipation. As he explained, “What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps save the Union.” Professor Escott summarizes the three central themes of Lincoln’s thinking at this time about blacks: “that freedom was not an object but a means of victory; that colonization was a major goal; and that no ideas of racial equality were being entertained.”

In his annual message of December 1862, Lincoln called on Congress to pass a Constitutional amendment that would direct the federal government to compensate any state that abolished slavery during the next 37 years, up until the year 1900. He even provided for the possibility that a state might reintroduce slavery after having first abolished it, but that would require repaying any compensation received. The amendment went nowhere, but shows the tentative, leisurely pace at which Lincoln was prepared to free slaves.

Lincoln eventually approved raising black troops but he took some convincing. In the fall of 1862 he complained that “if we were to arm them [blacks], I fear that in a few weeks the arms would be in the hands of the rebels.”

In his Proclamation of Amnesty and Reconstruction of December 1863, Lincoln drew up a road map for future Southern race relations. It included “apprenticeships” and “peonage” for freed blacks that would have been little different from slavery. His only requirement seemed to be that no slaves freed under the Emancipation Proclamation be reenslaved outright.

In a famous conversation reported by General Ben Butler but not otherwise confirmed, Lincoln was still talking about colonization at a time when the war was nearly won. In April 1865, he told the general it would be best for both blacks and whites if blacks could be sent away to some foreign land with a warm climate. At about the same time, he also expressed a mild “preference” that the most intelligent blacks might, under certain circumstances, be allowed to vote. Never in his life did Lincoln talk about social or political equality for blacks.

Prof. Escott devotes a dozen fascinating pages to the Hampton Roads peace conference of Feb. 3, 1865. Lincoln, along with his Secretary of State, William Seward, met with three Confederate representatives, including Vice President Alexander Stephens. No official records were kept of the discussions, but later accounts make it clear that even at this late date, Lincoln’s only non-negotiable demand was peace and reunification. Slavery was still an option. He again held out the possibility of making federal money available to compensate slaveholders for their property. By then, the 13th amendment had already been voted by Congress, but Lincoln suggested that if the Confederate states laid down their weapons and rejoined the Union they could vote as they pleased on the amendment, possibly defeating it. He even proposed the possibility of “prospective” approval of the amendment, or ratification to take place at some future date. This would have avoided what he called the “many evils” of immediate emancipation.

These reports from the conference show that even with the war nearly won, Lincoln was still thinking of ways to stop the killing and reunite the country, and was prepared to sacrifice the interests of blacks to those ends. It is far from certain whether he could have persuaded Congress to vote money for compensation, and some believe he was promising more than he could deliver in the hope of tricking the Confederates into stopping the war. In any case, his priorities at Hampton Roads were what they had always been: Union first, with blacks only a consideration to that end.
================

Offline Maj. Bill Martin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,943
  • Gender: Male
  • I'll make Mincemeat out of 'em"
Re: Trump says Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’
« Reply #35 on: January 07, 2024, 10:58:51 pm »
His withdrawal from the Presidency, for one.

So run for the nomination, then trick the voters who nominated you by quitting?   The voters in the North voted for the Republicans because of their position on slavery.  If Lincoln wouldn't have run, they'd have nominated someone else.

Quote
I still believe there could have been a diplomatic solution that eliminated slavery.

Such as....what?  Dred Scott essentially eliminated any possible middle ground.

In my view, any solution/compromise that permitted the expansion of slavery was unacceptable, and that view was prevalent in the North.  Nor would I have supported a constitutional amendment to guarantee slavery for an extended period.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2024, 11:05:14 pm by Maj. Bill Martin »

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51,688
  • Gender: Male
  • Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: Trump says Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’
« Reply #36 on: January 07, 2024, 11:20:08 pm »
It looks like Mr. Lincoln made more than one "offer" to the South for a conditional peace:

Source for the following excerpt:
amren.com/archives/back-issues/may-2010/#article1
======================
Lincoln’s priorities

Unlike the radical Republicans, Lincoln never thought of slaveholders as moral inferiors, even saying they were “just what we would be in their situation.” He was related by marriage to Confederates. His wife, Mary Todd, came from a family of 14 children, six of whom supported the North and eight supported the South. One of his wife’s sisters was married to a Confederate general.

Virtually until the end of the war, Lincoln supported gradual, compensated emancipation coupled with colonization — on the initiative of the states, but with federal support. Late in 1861, for example, he proposed a compensated abolition program for Delaware that would have been so gradual that some blacks would have remained slaves into the 20th century. The state legislature did not act on it.

Lincoln thought slavery was wrong but that a society with large numbers of free blacks living among whites was just as wrong. Gradual emancipation coupled with colonization would solve both problems. In 1861, he persuaded Congress to pass a resolution in favor of colonization, but nothing came of it.

In August 1862, Lincoln invited black leaders to the White House — the first time blacks ever came in an official capacity — to ask them to persuade their people to emigrate. As Prof. Escott explains: “He accepted as a fact that the racial problem in America was profound and intractable; he wanted to end the conflict between white Americans and reunite the sections; and he favored the removal of black Americans as a solution.”

Lincoln’s reputation as “the Great Emancipator” rests mainly on the proclamation, but Prof. Escott points out that this document is hardly a ringing endorsement of liberty. As is well known, it promised freedom only to those slaves in Confederate-controlled territory, which is to say, to those slaves over whom Lincoln had no power.

It is less well known that what is called the Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, issued on Sept. 22, 1862, offered the Confederate states 100 days to stop the fighting and send representatives to Congress. Any state that did so was urged to enact compensated emancipation, with funds to be paid from the US treasury. Blacks so freed would be encouraged to emigrate. However, emancipation was to be strictly a matter to be determined by the states, and any state that returned to the union could keep slavery intact. It was only if the southern states persisted in war that the slaves under their control would be freed. As the Cincinnati Gazette explained, “The way to save Slavery is simply to submit to the Constitution. . . . The way to destroy it is to persist in rebellion.”

At that time and repeatedly thereafter, Lincoln stated that the proclamation was strictly a war measure designed to weaken the South’s capacity to fight. He did not draft it in anything like the orotund phrases of which he was capable and thereby make it a monument to liberty. If anything, it reads like a bill of lading. At the same time, Lincoln was so solicitous of the cooperation of border state slave-holders that he exempted Kentucky and Tennessee from the proclamation, even though parts of those states were under Confederate control and would therefore have been subject to emancipation. As he explained, “What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps save the Union.” Professor Escott summarizes the three central themes of Lincoln’s thinking at this time about blacks: “that freedom was not an object but a means of victory; that colonization was a major goal; and that no ideas of racial equality were being entertained.”

In his annual message of December 1862, Lincoln called on Congress to pass a Constitutional amendment that would direct the federal government to compensate any state that abolished slavery during the next 37 years, up until the year 1900. He even provided for the possibility that a state might reintroduce slavery after having first abolished it, but that would require repaying any compensation received. The amendment went nowhere, but shows the tentative, leisurely pace at which Lincoln was prepared to free slaves.

Lincoln eventually approved raising black troops but he took some convincing. In the fall of 1862 he complained that “if we were to arm them [blacks], I fear that in a few weeks the arms would be in the hands of the rebels.”

In his Proclamation of Amnesty and Reconstruction of December 1863, Lincoln drew up a road map for future Southern race relations. It included “apprenticeships” and “peonage” for freed blacks that would have been little different from slavery. His only requirement seemed to be that no slaves freed under the Emancipation Proclamation be reenslaved outright.

In a famous conversation reported by General Ben Butler but not otherwise confirmed, Lincoln was still talking about colonization at a time when the war was nearly won. In April 1865, he told the general it would be best for both blacks and whites if blacks could be sent away to some foreign land with a warm climate. At about the same time, he also expressed a mild “preference” that the most intelligent blacks might, under certain circumstances, be allowed to vote. Never in his life did Lincoln talk about social or political equality for blacks.

Prof. Escott devotes a dozen fascinating pages to the Hampton Roads peace conference of Feb. 3, 1865. Lincoln, along with his Secretary of State, William Seward, met with three Confederate representatives, including Vice President Alexander Stephens. No official records were kept of the discussions, but later accounts make it clear that even at this late date, Lincoln’s only non-negotiable demand was peace and reunification. Slavery was still an option. He again held out the possibility of making federal money available to compensate slaveholders for their property. By then, the 13th amendment had already been voted by Congress, but Lincoln suggested that if the Confederate states laid down their weapons and rejoined the Union they could vote as they pleased on the amendment, possibly defeating it. He even proposed the possibility of “prospective” approval of the amendment, or ratification to take place at some future date. This would have avoided what he called the “many evils” of immediate emancipation.

These reports from the conference show that even with the war nearly won, Lincoln was still thinking of ways to stop the killing and reunite the country, and was prepared to sacrifice the interests of blacks to those ends. It is far from certain whether he could have persuaded Congress to vote money for compensation, and some believe he was promising more than he could deliver in the hope of tricking the Confederates into stopping the war. In any case, his priorities at Hampton Roads were what they had always been: Union first, with blacks only a consideration to that end.
================

So much for "the war was fought to free slaves"!
"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.

"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
- J. R. R. Tolkien

Offline LMAO

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,942
  • Gender: Male
Re: Trump says Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’
« Reply #37 on: January 07, 2024, 11:21:08 pm »
It looks like Mr. Lincoln made more than one "offer" to the South for a conditional peace:

Source for the following excerpt:
amren.com/archives/back-issues/may-2010/#article1
======================
Lincoln’s priorities

Unlike the radical Republicans, Lincoln never thought of slaveholders as moral inferiors, even saying they were “just what we would be in their situation.” He was related by marriage to Confederates. His wife, Mary Todd, came from a family of 14 children, six of whom supported the North and eight supported the South. One of his wife’s sisters was married to a Confederate general.

Virtually until the end of the war, Lincoln supported gradual, compensated emancipation coupled with colonization — on the initiative of the states, but with federal support. Late in 1861, for example, he proposed a compensated abolition program for Delaware that would have been so gradual that some blacks would have remained slaves into the 20th century. The state legislature did not act on it.

Lincoln thought slavery was wrong but that a society with large numbers of free blacks living among whites was just as wrong. Gradual emancipation coupled with colonization would solve both problems. In 1861, he persuaded Congress to pass a resolution in favor of colonization, but nothing came of it.

In August 1862, Lincoln invited black leaders to the White House — the first time blacks ever came in an official capacity — to ask them to persuade their people to emigrate. As Prof. Escott explains: “He accepted as a fact that the racial problem in America was profound and intractable; he wanted to end the conflict between white Americans and reunite the sections; and he favored the removal of black Americans as a solution.”

Lincoln’s reputation as “the Great Emancipator” rests mainly on the proclamation, but Prof. Escott points out that this document is hardly a ringing endorsement of liberty. As is well known, it promised freedom only to those slaves in Confederate-controlled territory, which is to say, to those slaves over whom Lincoln had no power.

It is less well known that what is called the Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, issued on Sept. 22, 1862, offered the Confederate states 100 days to stop the fighting and send representatives to Congress. Any state that did so was urged to enact compensated emancipation, with funds to be paid from the US treasury. Blacks so freed would be encouraged to emigrate. However, emancipation was to be strictly a matter to be determined by the states, and any state that returned to the union could keep slavery intact. It was only if the southern states persisted in war that the slaves under their control would be freed. As the Cincinnati Gazette explained, “The way to save Slavery is simply to submit to the Constitution. . . . The way to destroy it is to persist in rebellion.”

At that time and repeatedly thereafter, Lincoln stated that the proclamation was strictly a war measure designed to weaken the South’s capacity to fight. He did not draft it in anything like the orotund phrases of which he was capable and thereby make it a monument to liberty. If anything, it reads like a bill of lading. At the same time, Lincoln was so solicitous of the cooperation of border state slave-holders that he exempted Kentucky and Tennessee from the proclamation, even though parts of those states were under Confederate control and would therefore have been subject to emancipation. As he explained, “What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps save the Union.” Professor Escott summarizes the three central themes of Lincoln’s thinking at this time about blacks: “that freedom was not an object but a means of victory; that colonization was a major goal; and that no ideas of racial equality were being entertained.”

In his annual message of December 1862, Lincoln called on Congress to pass a Constitutional amendment that would direct the federal government to compensate any state that abolished slavery during the next 37 years, up until the year 1900. He even provided for the possibility that a state might reintroduce slavery after having first abolished it, but that would require repaying any compensation received. The amendment went nowhere, but shows the tentative, leisurely pace at which Lincoln was prepared to free slaves.

Lincoln eventually approved raising black troops but he took some convincing. In the fall of 1862 he complained that “if we were to arm them [blacks], I fear that in a few weeks the arms would be in the hands of the rebels.”

In his Proclamation of Amnesty and Reconstruction of December 1863, Lincoln drew up a road map for future Southern race relations. It included “apprenticeships” and “peonage” for freed blacks that would have been little different from slavery. His only requirement seemed to be that no slaves freed under the Emancipation Proclamation be reenslaved outright.

In a famous conversation reported by General Ben Butler but not otherwise confirmed, Lincoln was still talking about colonization at a time when the war was nearly won. In April 1865, he told the general it would be best for both blacks and whites if blacks could be sent away to some foreign land with a warm climate. At about the same time, he also expressed a mild “preference” that the most intelligent blacks might, under certain circumstances, be allowed to vote. Never in his life did Lincoln talk about social or political equality for blacks.

Prof. Escott devotes a dozen fascinating pages to the Hampton Roads peace conference of Feb. 3, 1865. Lincoln, along with his Secretary of State, William Seward, met with three Confederate representatives, including Vice President Alexander Stephens. No official records were kept of the discussions, but later accounts make it clear that even at this late date, Lincoln’s only non-negotiable demand was peace and reunification. Slavery was still an option. He again held out the possibility of making federal money available to compensate slaveholders for their property. By then, the 13th amendment had already been voted by Congress, but Lincoln suggested that if the Confederate states laid down their weapons and rejoined the Union they could vote as they pleased on the amendment, possibly defeating it. He even proposed the possibility of “prospective” approval of the amendment, or ratification to take place at some future date. This would have avoided what he called the “many evils” of immediate emancipation.

These reports from the conference show that even with the war nearly won, Lincoln was still thinking of ways to stop the killing and reunite the country, and was prepared to sacrifice the interests of blacks to those ends. It is far from certain whether he could have persuaded Congress to vote money for compensation, and some believe he was promising more than he could deliver in the hope of tricking the Confederates into stopping the war. In any case, his priorities at Hampton Roads were what they had always been: Union first, with blacks only a consideration to that end.
================

Interesting read. Thanks for posting
I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them.

Barry Goldwater

http://www.usdebtclock.org

My Avatar is my adult autistic son Tommy

Online Hoodat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36,778
Re: Trump says Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’
« Reply #38 on: January 08, 2024, 12:18:16 am »
Such as....what?  Dred Scott essentially eliminated any possible middle ground.

One of the fallouts of Dred Scott is that it was tacitly ignored by Northern States.  Abolitionists in States like Ohio regularly ran raiding parties into the South for the purpose of 'stealing' (kidnapping) slaves, bringing them back North, and freeing them.  Per Scott, the obligation of these Northern States was to acknowledge and support the property rights of Southern slave owners - an obligation which they openly rejected, and even more importantly, federal judges from the North showed open disdain.

Right or wrong, the South had a valid Constitutional basis for secession.
If a political party does not have its foundation in the determination to advance a cause that is right and that is moral, then it is not a political party; it is merely a conspiracy to seize power.

-Dwight Eisenhower-


"The [U.S.] Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals ... it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government ... it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen's protection against the government."

-Ayn Rand-

Offline jmyrlefuller

  • J. Myrle Fuller
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 22,393
  • Gender: Male
  • Realistic nihilist
    • Fullervision
Re: Trump says Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’
« Reply #39 on: January 08, 2024, 01:05:27 am »

Such as....what?  Dred Scott essentially eliminated any possible middle ground.

In my view, any solution/compromise that permitted the expansion of slavery was unacceptable, and that view was prevalent in the North.  Nor would I have supported a constitutional amendment to guarantee slavery for an extended period.
Not to let it get that far.

Too many politicians in the north coddled the south for too long. The north was the majority. They voluntarily abolished slavery on their own. But they didn't have the fortitude to do the same for the whole country. By the time of Scott v. Sanford, the South was far too emboldened after years of winning "compromises."

But there were no firm negotiators to tell them they were outnumbered, and that the answer would be "no." They rolled over, the Taney court rolled over, and that gave the South life enough to rebel.
New profile picture in honor of Public Domain Day 2024

Offline Timber Rattler

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,698
  • Conservative Purist and Patriot
Re: Trump says Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’
« Reply #40 on: January 08, 2024, 01:42:42 am »
It looks like Mr. Lincoln made more than one "offer" to the South for a conditional peace:

Yes he did, and even at the Hampton Roads Conference in February 1865 with Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens, Assistant Secretary of War Judge John A. Campbell, and Senator Robert Hunter, he even threw out an offer to buy out all of the South's slaves for $400 million, backed by Seward.  This was the British solution to their own earlier slavery problem.  The condition was that the seceded states had to return to the Union and give up independence.  Jeff Davis turned down the offer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hampton_Roads_Conference

This was a major expansion of his earlier plan:

Lincoln proposed emancipating slaves for $400 each early on in war

Quote
Barely a year into the Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln suggested buying slaves for $400 apiece under a “gradual emancipation” plan that would bring peace at less cost than several months of hostilities.

The proposal was outlined in one of 72 letters penned by Lincoln that ended up in the University of Rochester’s archives. The correspondence was digitally scanned and posted online along with easier-to- read transcriptions.

Accompanying them are 215 letters sent to Lincoln by dozens of fellow political and military leaders. They include letters from Vice President Andrew Johnson and Gen. Ulysses S. Grant, who both succeeded Lincoln in the presidency in the 12 years after his assassination in 1865.

In a letter to Illinois Sen. James A. McDougall dated March 14, 1862, Lincoln laid out the estimated cost to the nation’s coffers of his “emancipation with compensation” proposal.

Paying slave-holders $400 for each of the 1,798 slaves in Delaware listed in the 1860 Census, he wrote, would come to $719,200 at a time when the war was soaking up $2 million a day.

Buying the freedom of an estimated 432,622 slaves in Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky, Missouri and Washington, D.C., would cost $173,048,800 – nearly equal to the estimated $174 million needed to wage war for 87 days, he added.

Lincoln suggested that each of the states, in return for payment, might set something like a 20-year deadline for abolishing slavery.

The payout “would not be half as onerous as would be an equal sum, raised now, for the indefinite prosecution of the war,” he told McDougall.

The idea never took root. Six months later, Lincoln issued the first of two executive orders known as the Emancipation Proclamation that declared an end to slavery. The 13th Amendment to the Constitution was ratified after the collapse of the Confederacy, ending two centuries of bondage in North America.

https://www.dailynews.com/2008/03/03/lincoln-proposed-emancipating-slaves-for-400-each-early-on-in-war/

« Last Edit: January 08, 2024, 01:43:33 am by Timber Rattler »
aka "nasty degenerate SOB," "worst of the worst at Free Republic," "Garbage Troll," "Neocon Warmonger," "Filthy Piece of Trash," "damn $#%$#@!," "Silly f'er," "POS," "war pig," "neocon scumbag," "insignificant little ankle nipper," "@ss-clown," "neocuck," "termite," "Uniparty Deep stater," "Never Trump sack of dog feces," "avid Bidenista," "filthy Ukrainian," "war whore," "fricking chump," psychopathic POS, and depraved SOB.

"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act."  ---George Orwell

"If you want peace, prepare for war." ---Flavius Vegetius Renatus

Offline The_Reader_David

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,312
Re: Trump says Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’
« Reply #41 on: January 08, 2024, 02:37:01 am »
Typical Trump:  he thinks deal-making is a panacea for all the world's problems and thinks it was ever thus.
And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know what this was all about.

Offline Maj. Bill Martin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,943
  • Gender: Male
  • I'll make Mincemeat out of 'em"
Re: Trump says Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’
« Reply #42 on: January 08, 2024, 03:48:05 am »
Not to let it get that far.

Too many politicians in the north coddled the south for too long. The north was the majority. They voluntarily abolished slavery on their own. But they didn't have the fortitude to do the same for the whole country.

It wasn't a lack of fortitude - it was a lack of votes.   You had a majority of the north unwilling to accept the expansion of slavery, but not a majority for emancipation.  And the north also viewed fugitive slave laws as intolerable, which the south considered them essential.

Online Smokin Joe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 56,892
  • I was a "conspiracy theorist". Now I'm just right.
Re: Trump says Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’
« Reply #43 on: January 08, 2024, 06:09:11 am »
That is inexcusable.

How many of us have actually been in government or run for national office, yet we are much better informed than he is on all sorts of governmental issues.  And that's because we love and care about the country, and spent a lot of our "leisure" time staying informed.

Trump, by contrast, was chasing women, making garbage TV shows, and playing golf.  Where's the concern for country in all that?   Did he not understand the major issues of the day over the last 45 years?  Did he not pay attention??

The fact that he didn't understand government is an indictment of his unfitness, not a valid excuse.  And that's not even mentioning that he's had the last EIGHT YEARS plus of doing nothing but politics and educating himself.   And he still hasn't.  Also, I suspect that if most of us got a job where we lacked some of the necessary background, we'd bust our ass to catch up.  Trump just doesn't care.

Couldn't he have skipped a few of those golf games to read some freaking books?  Get educated on how government and the law works, study some history?? But he did none of that.

He is an intellectually lazy, narcissistic boob.
Well, he had access to sources we definitely did not.
As for how much use he made of those, Lead a Horse to Water...
How God must weep at humans' folly! Stand fast! God knows what he is doing!
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

C S Lewis

Offline LMAO

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,942
  • Gender: Male
Re: Trump says Civil War ‘could have been negotiated’
« Reply #44 on: January 09, 2024, 02:02:41 pm »
That is inexcusable.

How many of us have actually been in government or run for national office, yet we are much better informed than he is on all sorts of governmental issues.  And that's because we love and care about the country, and spent a lot of our "leisure" time staying informed.

Trump, by contrast, was chasing women, making garbage TV shows, and playing golf.  Where's the concern for country in all that?   Did he not understand the major issues of the day over the last 45 years?  Did he not pay attention??

The fact that he didn't understand government is an indictment of his unfitness, not a valid excuse.  And that's not even mentioning that he's had the last EIGHT YEARS plus of doing nothing but politics and educating himself.   And he still hasn't.  Also, I suspect that if most of us got a job where we lacked some of the necessary background, we'd bust our ass to catch up.  Trump just doesn't care.

Couldn't he have skipped a few of those golf games to read some freaking books?  Get educated on how government and the law works, study some history?? But he did none of that.

He is an intellectually lazy, narcissistic boob.

So what’s you’re saying is that you also doubt that he’s “obsessed with going down in the history books as the president that saved America?” wink777
I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them.

Barry Goldwater

http://www.usdebtclock.org

My Avatar is my adult autistic son Tommy